↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility and efficacy of diabetic retinopathy screening among youth with diabetes in a pediatric endocrinology clinic: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Feasibility and efficacy of diabetic retinopathy screening among youth with diabetes in a pediatric endocrinology clinic: a cross-sectional study
Published in
Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13098-015-0054-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeffrey L. Tapley, Gerald McGwin, Ambika P. Ashraf, Paul A. MacLennan, Koula Callahan, Karen Searcey, C. Douglas Witherspoon, Jinan Saaddine, Cynthia Owsley

Abstract

We examined the feasibility and efficacy of using a non-mydriatic camera to screen for diabetic retinopathy (DR) among youth with type 1 or type 2 diabetes seen in a pediatric endocrinology clinic serving Alabama, the state that has the highest diabetes rate in the United States. 236 youths with type 1 or type 2 diabetes were screened for DR using a non-mydriatic camera. Visual acuity was also assessed. A questionnaire asked parents about diabetes and eye care history. Mean duration since diabetes diagnosis was 5.5 years. 66 % reported receiving an eye examination within the previous year. 97.5 % had images that were gradable. DR was detected in 3.8 % of participants. 9.1 % were visually impaired. Use of a non-mydriatic fundus camera is feasible and efficacious for DR screening in youth with diabetes. DR screening at routine endocrinology visits may be beneficial in managing youth with diabetes and preventing irreversible vision loss, particularly for those in regions where diabetes rates are high.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 20%
Other 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Professor 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Other 8 27%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 5 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 July 2015.
All research outputs
#20,282,766
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome
#563
of 666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,008
of 264,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome
#9
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 666 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.